I'm not satisfied with my color management and I need a systematic approach to correct it. Any online sources, books or anything else you can recommend?

I have two coloredge monitors that I calibrate and I use a pro lab for photographic prints up to 8x12 and my z3100 for larger prints and canvas. Basically the prints from the lab appears too dark and the prints from the z3100 appears too warm (color) while B&W seems too dark. I shoot digital and b&w film, use CS2, Nikon LS-5000 for film and Qimage for the z3100.

Right now I don't know what is right and what is wrong, where to start and what I need to get things "right"...

Basically the prints from the lab appears too dark and the prints from the z3100 appears too warm (color) while B&W seems too dark.

So are you calibrating the display for the viewing conditions which would include the luminance and white point? You may need to alter both for a good screen to print match. Its also possible the output profile is less than ideal.

I'm not satisfied with my color management and I need a systematic approach to correct it. Any online sources, books or anything else you can recommend?

I have two coloredge monitors that I calibrate and I use a pro lab for photographic prints up to 8x12 and my z3100 for larger prints and canvas. Basically the prints from the lab appears too dark and the prints from the z3100 appears too warm (color) while B&W seems too dark. I shoot digital and b&w film, use CS2, Nikon LS-5000 for film and Qimage for the z3100.

Right now I don't know what is right and what is wrong, where to start and what I need to get things "right"...

Do you use the lab's profile for their paper and printer for the images you send there? If not, you must. How are you profiling the z3100?

I agree with the other recommendations re the Reichmann/Schewe Camera to Print tutorials, the Fraser/Murphy/Bunting book on Color Management, but would also recommend Andrew Rodney's "Color Management for Photographers" and Tim Grey's "Color Confidence". The last is the most elementary of the lot and perhaps a good place to start. There is also much free information on the internet about how to set-up a decent colour-managed workflow.

I have the From Camera To Print videos and have watched them. But it's more of an overview of the entire process and I'm not sure it's enough for me.

Starting at the monitor I calibrate the CG19 monitor with Eizo's software Colornavigator and a spyder 2 puck. I select luminance 100 cd/m2, white point 6500K and gamma 2.2. I get white at 100.1 cd/m2, black at 0.4 cd/m2, 6486K. My area around the monitor is dark, around 3-3.5EV, which is around 20-30 lux.

Question is, how do I know if the calibration is good without introducing something else that has it's own calibration/profile?

The lab I use takes any profile embedded into the image file and uses it. They have softproof profiles for their machines but they don't recommend converting the image into that profile but rather say stay in the working profile and only use their profile for softproofing.

I don't have a viewing booth so maybe the prints I get from the lab are good and the ambient lighting where I view the print is too low or maybe the prints are too dark. They look too dark to my eye. How can I determine which?

On the z3100 I use the embedded i1 to calibrate and profile.I've also tried the factory profiles since I use HP's papers.

And again, since everything at this point is an unknown, how do I know which is "right"? Monitor, lab prints or z3100 print?

To really know, you need a spectrophotometer to measure LAB values of a print. But to get a general idea, download the LAB TIFF image of a Color Checker from http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?C...CheckerRGB.html, then print it from Photoshop using Absolute Colorimetric rendering intent and the appropriate printer profile. Compare the monitor image and print to an actual Color Checker, and see how close the colors appear to match. If you can get it, use a spectro to measure how close the print gets to the actual correct LAB color values.

I have the From Camera To Print videos and have watched them. But it's more of an overview of the entire process and I'm not sure it's enough for me.

Starting at the monitor I calibrate the CG19 monitor with Eizo's software Colornavigator and a spyder 2 puck. I select luminance 100 cd/m2, white point 6500K and gamma 2.2. I get white at 100.1 cd/m2, black at 0.4 cd/m2, 6486K. My area around the monitor is dark, around 3-3.5EV, which is around 20-30 lux.

Question is, how do I know if the calibration is good without introducing something else that has it's own calibration/profile?

The lab I use takes any profile embedded into the image file and uses it. They have softproof profiles for their machines but they don't recommend converting the image into that profile but rather say stay in the working profile and only use their profile for softproofing.

I don't have a viewing booth so maybe the prints I get from the lab are good and the ambient lighting where I view the print is too low or maybe the prints are too dark. They look too dark to my eye. How can I determine which?

On the z3100 I use the embedded i1 to calibrate and profile.I've also tried the factory profiles since I use HP's papers.

And again, since everything at this point is an unknown, how do I know which is "right"? Monitor, lab prints or z3100 print?

What is the lighting brightness and color Temp. of the final or where the print will be hung.There to is a variable.I use Solux 4700 K lights to view my prints.I quess you would have to ask Digital Dog what is AVERAGE ,as in how bright and what temp and how far the print will be viewed at, for more answers.My prints are hung in my house with no lights on them and the biggest print I have on the wall is 24x24, from a Z3100ps GP.Also what is the color of the room that your printer is in? My prints look good in the rooms they hang in no matter what the light is .And the walls are YELLOW in the rooms they hang in.There are lots of variables.The people that do your prints, all the techs there have different judgement of how a print should look.Take out one variable at a time.Some variables cannot be controlled like the end buyer of the prints.Under what lighting conditions are they going to hang your print in?To me it's all about eliminating variables.You cannot eliminate all of them , but try to get rid of as many as you can.Go to your printer and see what they use to judge/lighting to view the prints under.Maybe they use a viewing booth, maybe not.The Solux fixtures and the bulbs are not that expensive.

The lab I use takes any profile embedded into the image file and uses it. They have softproof profiles for their machines but they don't recommend converting the image into that profile but rather say stay in the working profile and only use their profile for softproofing.

That makes sense - what I was getting at is that you should have their printer profile installed as your soft-proof condition, so you can adjust the image to get it to look right under that softproof. Provided your display is well calibrated and profiled, and provided their software converts from the embedded working space to their output profile correctly, the print that comes back should not have nasty surprises.

To really know, you need a spectrophotometer to measure LAB values of a print. But to get a general idea, download the LAB TIFF image of a Color Checker from http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html?C...CheckerRGB.html, then print it from Photoshop using Absolute Colorimetric rendering intent and the appropriate printer profile. Compare the monitor image and print to an actual Color Checker, and see how close the colors appear to match. If you can get it, use a spectro to measure how close the print gets to the actual correct LAB color values.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206036\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Good idea, while I don't own a spectrophotometer I could easily compare the print to a color checker. That should give me some kind of indication if I have a problem with my z3100 prints or not.

What is the lighting brightness and color Temp. of the final or where the print will be hung.There to is a variable.I use Solux 4700 K lights to view my prints.I quess you would have to ask Digital Dog what is AVERAGE ,as in how bright and what temp and how far the print will be viewed at, for more answers.My prints are hung in my house with no lights on them and the biggest print I have on the wall is 24x24, from a Z3100ps GP.Also what is the color of the room that your printer is in? My prints look good in the rooms they hang in no matter what the light is .And the walls are YELLOW in the rooms they hang in.There are lots of variables.The people that do your prints, all the techs there have different judgement of how a print should look.Take out one variable at a time.Some variables cannot be controlled like the end buyer of the prints.Under what lighting conditions are they going to hang your print in?To me it's all about eliminating variables.You cannot eliminate all of them , but try to get rid of as many as you can.Go to your printer and see what they use to judge/lighting to view the prints under.Maybe they use a viewing booth, maybe not.The Solux fixtures and the bulbs are not that expensive.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Good point, I'll take that into consideration too. If anyone knows any de facto standards for viewing conditions that would be great.

That makes sense - what I was getting at is that you should have their printer profile installed as your soft-proof condition, so you can adjust the image to get it to look right under that softproof. Provided your display is well calibrated and profiled, and provided their software converts from the embedded working space to their output profile correctly, the print that comes back should not have nasty surprises.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206045\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, that sounds logical. I guess the rendering intent they use when converting from my working profile to their machine specific profile also makes a difference. Hmm, is it likely that their equipment uses the perceptual rendering intent?

Yes, that sounds logical. I guess the rendering intent they use when converting from my working profile to their machine specific profile also makes a difference. Hmm, is it likely that their equipment uses the perceptual rendering intent?

Thanks Edmund. In essence I have concluded that I don't understand enough (yet) about color management to find out what is wrong with my setup. After looking around and browsing a few books I decided to get Real World Color Managment instead of the one you recommanded as it had more background information and theory, which I think I will benefit from.